National Science Foundation
Engineering Research Centers Program
FY 2002-2003 Solicitation (NSF 02-24)
Environmental Quality Systems Engineering Research Center
H. Ezzat Khalifa, PI and Center Director, Syracuse University
Lead:
Core Partners:
Syracuse University
Clarkson University
Cornell University
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo
University of Puerto Rico-Mayaguez
Proposal Number: (EEC-0310684)
Site Visit Report
March 24-26, 2003
Site Visit Team
Professor Mustafa Aral
School of Civil & Environmental Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, GA 30332-0355
Professor Byron Jones
Director, Engineering Experiment Station
Kansas State University
1048 Rathbone Hall
Manhattan, KS 66506-5204
Professor Ben Koopman
Department of Environmental Sciences
University of Florida
322 Black Hill
Gainesville, FL 32611-6450
Professor David Kosson
Department of Chemical Engineering
Vanderbilt University
Nashville, TN 37235
Dr. Hal Levin
Building Ecology Reserve Group
2548 Empire Circle
Santa Cruz, CA 95060-9748
Professor Jelena Srebric
Department of Architectural Engineering
Penn State University
222 Engineering Unit A
University Park, PA 16802-1417
Professor Makram Suidan
Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering
Advanced Photonic Technologies
University of Cincinnati
Main Campus
Cincinnati, OH 45221-0071
ERC Panel Members:
Dr. Sara Graves, Department of Computer Science, The University of Alabama
2
Dr. Nader Najafi, President & CEO (ISSYS)
Dr. Richard Sause, Department of Structural Engineering, Lehigh University
NSF Staff Members:
Dr. Tapan Muhkerjee, Program Director, Division of Engineering Education & Centers, ENG,
Team Leader
Dr. Permusalsamy Balaguru, Program Director, Division of Civil & Mechanical Systems, ENG
Dr. Aspasia Zerva, Program Director, Division of Engineering Education & Centers, ENG
3
A. Executive Summary
The Syracuse University in core partnership with Cornell University, Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute (RPI), Clarkson University, SUNY Buffalo, and University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez
has proposed to establish an ERC for Intelligent Environmental Quality Systems (i-EQS).
Intelligent Built Environmental Systems (i-BES) and Intelligent Urban Environmental Systems (iUES) are the two engineered systems that form the drivers of the Center’s strategic research plan.
The results of fundamental research performed by the Center will provide inputs to the two
engineered systems test beds.
Intellectual merit
How important is the activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field
or across different fields? How well qualified is the team to conduct the project? To what
extent does the activity suggest and explore creative and original concepts? How well conceived
and organized is it? Is there sufficient access to resources?
The ERC will take a unified approach to controlling and improving environmental quality across a
broader range of spatial and temporal scales than possible with current state-of-the-art systems.
Technology and fundamental research will address critical barriers in seven areas: sensors &
monitoring devices, modeling and simulation tools, transport phenomena, biological & chemical
processes, and human performance. The Center Director and the leaders of research thrusts are very
well-known in their respective specializations, and individually, they have excellent publication
track records.
Broader impacts
How well does that activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching,
training, and learning? How well does it broaden the participation of underrepresented groups
(e.g. gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent does it enhance the
infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and
partnerships? Are the results disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological
understanding? What are and may be the benefits to society?
The Syracuse University and its five core partners form an excellent team that is diverse in
expertise, gender and ethnicity. The Center’s research and education activities will impact 178
graduate students (37% female and 17% underrepresented minorities). The ERC has an extensive
program for K-12 students and middle- and high school teachers involving eight schools and one
museum. The societal impact of intelligent environmental quality technologies on individuals and
society in general will be investigated by social scientists, health economists and public health
regulation specialists. The Center will have a Council of Deans and Academic leadership Council
to propagate the ERC culture within its partner institutions. Outcomes will include more students
pursuing environmental engineering as a profession.
Clarification: The multidisciplinary, engineered-systems-focused nature of EQS ERC will lead
to the education of engineers & computer scientists from a wide range of disciplines, not just
environmental engineering.
4
1. Vision, Potential Impact
Vision
The ERC proposes the development of intelligent environmental quality systems that sense air and
water quality and safety parameters and adjusts these parameters to meet the personal preferences of
end users at the scale of personal, built and urban environments. It is envisioned that these
intelligent systems can provide temperature, air quality, lighting, humidity, etc. conditions at the
scale of a desktop, office, or a bedroom. At the urban scale system, the intelligent systems are
designed to improve air and water quality. The ERC envisions that the intelligent environmental
control systems can lead to societal benefits in the areas of health, human performance and
productivity, sustainability, and security.
This ambitious vision is well-articulated throughout the proposal and is strongly supported in the
research and educational plans provided. The research proposed under the Center can lead to
measurable improvements in human health and quality of life at the individual project level as well
as when it is viewed as a whole. The students produced by this Center will be highly sought after
for applications in environmental control as well as in the emerging homeland security area.
Systems Review Criterion:
 Proposal defines an emerging engineered system with strong potential to spawn new
industries, transform our current industrial base, service delivery system or infrastructure,
and have a broad societal impact.
The theme of continuously sensing and controlling the personal environment is very timely and can
lead to measurable improvements in health, efficiency, and productivity in the work place and a
better quality of life overall. The assembled team already includes a sizable industrial partnership
that will facilitate adoption and broad application of the new technologies developed by the EQS
ERC. Developments in sensor technology will not be limited to applications in the specific test beds
mentioned in the proposal but can also be applied to numerous other systems. The technologies
developed in the built environmental systems (i-BES) can lead to the spawning of a new industrial
base. The research team in i-BES has the potential to become a world leader in the area of tailored
environmental control.
While the impacts of the urban environmental systems technologies on infrastructure and broad
sectors of society will be very high, its impact on the transformation of industrial base is uncertain.
In that context, i-UES seems to be somewhat weaker compared to the robustness of i-BES.
Response: The EQS ERC does indeed have tremendous potential to spawn new industries and
transform existing industries in the BES sector. We also agree with the Site Review Team that
the EQS ERC impact in the UES sector is more focused on transforming service delivery
systems and infrastructural elements (e.g., urban airshed and watershed management systems).
Our past work in this area and envisioned future work through the EQS ERC has involved
interactions with federal, state and local government groups, as well as non-governmental
organizations (NGOs). It is through these interactions that intelligent urban environmental
systems (i-UES) will have the greatest impact on human health, ecosystem sustainability, and
security. For example, in the area of homeland security, an intelligent watershed monitoring
and management/control system could be developed to protect the public from the effects of an
5
accidental or intentional introduction of chemical or biological contaminants. The involvement
of industrial partners, whether in system design & construction or component development, will
be critical in the development of such systems as well as the full range of i-UES systems. We
therefore have a strong commitment to developing relationships with industrial partners in the
UES sector. These partners include electric utilities such as National Grid USA (who have a
strong, regulation-induced interest in airshed quality), construction and environmental
consulting and remediation firms such as C&S Engineers and O’Brien & Gere, sensor fusion
firms like Sensis, and manufacturers such Rupprecht & Patashnick.
Beyond this direct impact of i-UES, there are critical linkages between BES and UES that are
central to the proposed EQS ERC. i-UES and i-BES share a similar conceptual framework that
will enable sharing of many advances in fundamental and enabling technology areas, including
control system architecture, information management, sensors, and simulation tools. Industries
involved in commercialization of these technologies with the EQS ERC will pursue applications
in both BES and UES sectors. [Charley, Eric]
Another positive impact of the ERC is the proposed six-university course-sharing program. This
endeavor, which is already being tested, will provide for a much larger faculty, broader exposure,
and more specialization while, at the same time maintaining reasonable class sizes.
2. Strategic Research Plan and Research Program
Strategic Plan Review Criteria:
 Research plan targets critical systems goals, identifies challenging scientific and technical
barriers to be overcome and proposes research projects and proof-of-concept test-beds to
address these barriers;
The ERC identifies four critical societal goals: (1) 90% reduction in occupants’ exposure to indoor
chemical and biological contaminants, (2) 75% reduction in percentage of dissatisfied building
occupants, (3) 50% reduction in energy used for building environmental control, and (4) buildings,
urban areas and water reservoirs protected from chemical and biological threats. The first goal may
be overly optimistic. The basis for evaluating the outcomes of the second goal was not clearly
explained in the proposal or in the response to site visit team questions. The proposal states that
these goals will be achieved by research and development of intelligent environmental quality
systems, e.g., Intelligent Built Environmental Systems (i-BES) and Intelligent Urban Environmental
Systems (i-UES). The i-BES and i-UES drive the research, and the research plan identifies the
research thrusts for each system. The systems cover the range from personal (micro-scale) to urban
(macro-scale).
Response: In order to measure if each of the goals will be achieved, we will first establish
baseline data as reference points. For goal 1, several large databases are available on the
concentration levels in office and residential buildings (e.g., the EPA BASE program). A 90%
reduction in occupants’ exposure to indoor chemical and biological contaminants are
challenging, but achievable through the control of the source emission rates, effective air
filtration/purification, and control of the micro-environment around the occupants. For
example, in a 1993 field study by Dr. Alan Hedge (Co-Leader of the Human Performance
Thrust), he found that using a then available Breathing Zone Filtration (BZF) unit in office
workstations resulted in 45% better indoor air quality. Since existing air purification devices
6
are not very effective for many indoor pollutants (e.g., many products based on activatedcarbon media were found not to be very effective for light compounds such as formaldehyde
when other compounds with greater molecular weight co-exist in the air), and existing personal
environmental controls are primitive, there is great potential for improvement. Our envisioned
i-BES for personal environmental control will have much better control on the quality of air the
occupants are actually exposed to because of significantly improved air filtration/purification
devices and air delivery system for the microenvironment.
For goal 2, “75% reduction in percentage of dissatisfied building occupants” means reducing
the percentage of dissatisfied occupants to 5% or less from the 20% specified in existing design
standards (ASHRAE standard 55 for thermal comfort and 62 for ventilation and IAQ), which
call for 80% occupants’ satisfaction as design goals (while actual building environments are
usually less satisfactory and an estimated 25-30% of occupants are often dissatisfied with their
indoor environments). Our envisioned i-BES will not only provide control of the physical
environmental conditions, but also allow the occupants to conveniently adjust/customize the
micro-environment to satisfy their individual needs. As a result, the percentage of satisfied
occupants can potentially reach 100%. Not only will micro-environmental control lead to
higher occupant satisfaction, but also it has the potential to reduce energy consumption for
building environmental control. [Jensen, Ez]
Two test beds are planned to integrate the technologies for each engineered system: Personal and
Building Test beds will be used to demonstrate integration of technologies developed for i-BES.
Elements of the former test bed are already in place, whereas high-performance building features
will be demonstrated in the major remodeling of two floors (44,000 sq. ft.) of the Link Engineering
Building that will house administration, faculty and student offices, and laboratory space for the
Center. Sensors for the Watershed Test bed are largely in place, whereas the sensor placement for
the Airshed Test bed awaits development of lower-cost equipment as a part of the Center research.
Clarification: Some features of i-EQS for high performance buildings will be demonstrated in
the Building Energy and Environmental Systems Laboratory (BEESL) and Total Indoor
Environmental Quality (TIEQ) simulator testbeds, which are an integral part of the proposed
EQS ERC HQ in Link Hall. In addition, integrated i-EQS for high performance buildings will
be demonstrated in the planned $15M Center of Excellence HQ building. [Jensen, Ez]
Technical barriers identified to achieving the critical systems goals are common to both i-BES and
i-UES. They are:







Affordable environmental sensors
Distributed computing and control
Efficient environmental control devices
Fast, high-fidelity modeling and simulation tools
In-depth understanding of combined energy, biological and chemical species and processes
Quantitative characterization of critical biological and chemical processes
EQS-related health and productivity metrics
Four thrusts at the enabling technology level (environmental sensors & monitoring devices,
intelligent control and information management, environmental quality control devices, and
modeling & simulation tools) and three thrusts at the fundamental research level (transport
phenomena, biological & chemical processes, and human performance) are organized to overcome
these barriers.
7
The state of knowledge and state of the art in heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) and
air and water quality assessment in urban environments are thoroughly discussed with respect to
national and international developments. A convincing case is made for increased use of sensors
and the networking of sensed information for model-based control to achieve dramatic
improvements in effectiveness. This discussion led to the technical barriers discussed above.
Research Program Review Criteria:




Proposing significant goals and targeting significant barriers;
Proposing research methodologies that will advance the state of the art;
Integrating knowledge from other projects and thrusts needed to achieve the Thrust's goals;
Proposing a core and research outreach team with the skills and disciplines needed to
achieve the goals.
Research: Overview
The research activities of the ERC proposal are multilevel. The research thrust areas include airshed
modeling, watershed modeling and indoor air quality modeling, and the integration of the modeling
and simulation systems with the sensor technology, all of which are eventually linked to intelligent
control of these environments. The indoor air quality modeling efforts are well linked to existing
laboratory and modeling efforts of the research team members. The industrial partners are
enthusiastic supporters of this activity due to the innovative technological progress that this research
field provides to their operations as well as to marketing. This link is a very positive component and
provides an environment that may lead to innovative technologies brought to the consumer. This is
a very positive component of the overall proposal and one of the important contributions of the
ERCs supported by NSF. It would have been more desirable if the technical aspects of the linkage
of the sensor technology and simulation efforts and control processes were more clearly defined.
Nevertheless, the synergy is there, current research work is there, sensor technologies required are
there, the industrial partners are there to support these activities and are ready to take these efforts to
the implementation level. All of this is encouraging and commendable.
Response: The focus of our center is to develop intelligent systems for environmental quality via
sensor-driven and model-based intelligently controlled systems. This vision will be realized by
the synergistic combination of information acquisition from sensors, reduced-order control
worthy models to capture the multiple time and spatial resolutions for real time control and
optimization, modeling and simulations, automated reasoning tools, and hierarchical
information processing.
Due to the complexity of the EQS systems and their large spatial extent, distributed sensing
must be combined with analysis, interpretation and decision making (SAID), and control actions
must be based not only on sensor readings but also on model predictions of the spatial and
temporal evolution of system state variables. Therefore, our research will first focus on
developing automated partitioning methods that will divide a reduced order model into a
hierarchy of overlapping local models of manageable complexity in terms of real time control.
Overlapping local models will enable the hierarchical and distributed control via reduced
complexity and communication bandwidth. Real-time control of complex EQS, particularly in
response to transient events (e.g., CBA attack), is not possible without the integration of
sensing with modeling & simulation (M&S fills in the spatial and temporal gaps associated with
8
the use of a finite number of sensors and actuators and with the relatively long system time
constants. Specific examples of the planned sensor/M&S/control integration tasks include:
1) Development of real time model-based controllers including, e.g., adaptive, learning, model
predictive and forecasting controllers, and inverse controllers, that will fully exploit the models
and therefore assure the environment quality. For example, a real-time model can be used to
forecast the effect of a measured disturbance based on which correcting actions can be taken to
preempt the negative effects.
2) Near Real Time (NRT) simulation of EQS system’s response to an event such as the release of
a CBA, and controller actions. Such simulations enable us to draw up an optimal control
strategy and proper response plans beforehand as well as in NRT.
3) Evaluation, VIA NRT SIMULATION, of the effectiveness and response time of sensors and
actuators that are critical to resource allocation such as sensor placement.
4) Development of model based virtual sensor that estimates one physical variable from the
measurements of other(s). Virtual sensing is particularly beneficial in EQS due to the sparsely
located sensors and actuators.
To show specific linkage in some technical depth, one specific illustrative example of a multizone environment in an i-BES system was presented in oral and poster formats during the site
visit in which we showed how sensors will be used to detect the release of a harmful chemical
agent (tracer gas in our experiments) as quickly as possible, and modeling and simulation will
be used to determine the dispersion in each of the zones and optimal control action will be taken
(from many feasible actions such as increase in pressure, opening of exhaust dampers, etc.) to
mitigate the effects of the release and to provide a safe haven as well as evacuation routes. In
another example, we illustrated the role of model based control in the context of precision
temperature control. This concept has the potential to improve the performance of indoor and
urban control systems by an order or magnitude or more. [Jim Li, Pramod]
The watershed modeling, its link to sensor technologies and the follow-up intelligent control
system, however, is another challenge. The modeling efforts of the research partners are at their
infancy and not much detail is provided on this effort. In the watershed modeling systems the key
issue of integration of different time scales and spatial scales in multi-media modeling systems are
not addressed adequately. The purpose of the intelligent control systems for watersheds is not as
well defined as for the airsheds. Industrial partners in this area are more restricted, development
efforts are not well defined, or may not be as attractive to the industry partners when compared to
the application potential of indoor air quality systems discussed earlier. This test bed of the ERC
proposal represents a bigger challenge to implement, as compared to the other test beds.
Response: We agree with some aspects of this comment. Watershed modeling is an important
component and challenge in this EQS ERC. However, because of space and time constraints we
chose not to focus on this activity in the proposal or the presentation at the site visit. Rather, we
largely emphasized applications involving surface water modeling, although some work on
watershed modeling was presented in poster presentations during the site visit. Through the
work of Dr. C. T. Driscoll, our activities in watershed modeling have largely involved
assessment of the effects of air pollution and land management on soil and surface waters.
Using watershed models we have examined the response of: 1) sensitive forest ecosystems to
9
controls of sulfur dioxide emissions [1-4] 1, 2) coastal ecosystems to a range of point and nonpoint nitrogen management strategies (atmospheric nitrogen deposition, advanced wastewater
treatment, agricultural management practices [5, 6], and 3) aquatic ecosystems to inputs of
mercury [7, 8]. i-EQS will be a challenge to implement for watersheds because: 1) of the large
spatial scale of these systems, 2) of the long-time frame over which watershed-based
environmental problems occur and 3) of complexity associated with other disturbances such as
climatic disturbance or the introduction of invasive species. However, we believe that our recent
work sets the stage for the development of intelligent environmental systems at the watershed
scale. For example the states of New York and Connecticut have developed a Total Maximum
Daily Load (TMDL) for Long Island Sound to address the consequences of hypoxia due to
elevated inputs of nitrogen. There are many diverse sources of nitrogen to coastal ecosystems.
Intelligent control systems linking monitoring and modeling activities could be an effective tool
to address these problems [6]. As New York and Connecticut implement a TMDL, they are
considering a pollutant discharge-trading component of this agreement. We believe that an
intelligent environmental control system would greatly facilitate the successful implementation
of such a system. As discussed above, we will need to work hard to bring in industrial partners
with interest in UES into the EQS ERC. However we do have strong commitments from electric
utilities (National Grid), environmental consulting and remediation firms (O’Brien & Gere),
construction firms (C&S Engineers), sensor manufacturers (Rupprecht & Patashnick), and
sensor information fusion (Sensis). [Charley]
Urban Environmental System
The i-UES system focuses on airshed monitoring, simulation and control and watershed monitoring,
simulation and control. The project team was knowledgeable about the state of knowledge and
critical issues with respect to both areas. Team members are academically strong in their areas of
expertise and very receptive to working on multi-disciplinary teams. Critical system goals and
challenges in each area were clearly identified. Appropriate test beds (airsheds for Syracuse and
Rochester, a watershed in the vicinity of Syracuse) were identified. The researchers provided
appropriate goals and strategies for overcoming specific challenges for specific components of the
thrust area (e.g., sensor development). Integration of individual components of the thrust area to
provide an integrated approach to solving specific systems-level challenges was provided at a
conceptual level but not carried through to clear lines of integration to form a complete integrated
approach to resolving a specific problem within either a watershed or airshed (e.g., sensing,
monitoring, modeling and control strategies for particulates within an airshed). However, a strong
management strategy has been presented that would allow for improved integration as the proposed
ERC evolves. Integration and synergy of airshed sensing, monitoring, and modeling with analogous
issues for the indoor environment (i-BES) were clear, as was industrial endorsement and enthusiasm
for this research. Control strategies to be integrated with the sensing and monitoring for airsheds
were not as apparent. A clear challenge for the ERC will be achieving clearer synergy and
integration (where appropriate) of the watershed challenges to be addressed with the airshed and
indoor environmental thrusts, given the differences in media to be sensed (i.e., water vs. air), critical
parameters, time scales and possible control strategies. Similarly, the ERC is challenged to develop
a broader industrial constituency for the watershed component of the thrust area. An additional
challenge for the ERC will be gaining adequate supplemental funding to achieve the multiple
sensing locations necessary to achieve the goals articulated for airshed and watershed monitoring
1
Numbers in square brackets designate references at the end of the document.
10
consistent with modeling and control strategies. Given the strong support indicated from the State
of New York for the ERC, the ERC management is encouraged to work with the relevant regulatory
agencies to achieve sufficient monitoring for the ERC purposes. Resolution of these challenges
should be part of the natural evolution of the ERC.
Response: In the proposal and the SV presentation we provided several examples of how an
intelligent environmental system could be developed and implemented to address a range of air
and water quality issues. Some of these examples included:
 The development of an i-UES to forecast and detect air quality problems in urban areas
associated with events resulting in high concentrations of ozone or fine particulate matter,
coupled with a management/warning activities that might include additional controls/curtailed
activities at electric utilities, modification of commuting traffic patterns, and or alerts to the
community/ schools and hospitals.
 The development and use of an i-UES to ensure the protection of sensitive ecosystems from
the effects of air pollutants and atmospheric deposition.
 The development and application of techniques to mitigate heat island effects and improve
associated air quality.
 The use of i-UES in homeland security to protect water supplies against accidental or
intentional contamination or climatic events.
 The use of i-UES to track pollutant inputs and serve as a basis for a pollutant trading system
in the implementation of total maximum daily load (TMDL) programs.
In these and other projects, research teams will couple monitoring (e.g., traditional, near-realtime, remote sensing) with modeling and data analysis through information management
activities. These linked activities will allow the development of intelligent control strategies that
will enable resource managers to implement control actions. Sensing and modeling activities
will be supported by fundamental research in the areas of chemical and biological processes
and transport phenomena. To ensure successful integration, we view the development of systems
and their tetbeds as the critical overarching integrative activity of the EQS ERC. Projects teams
will be assembled with keen research interest in a system/testbed program and with expertise in
the relevant technologies and fundamentals necessary to develop the system/testbed. Project
success will be assessed based the integrated activities of the team in advancing the systems and
their testbed.
There appears to be some continuing confusion regarding the relevance of our proposed (1)
watershed activities to those of the (2) airshed and the (3) built environment:
(1)  (2): We have a long history of leadership in integrating airshed and watershed studies
and have performed pioneering work that identifies the impact of air quality to watershed
quality and sustainability [1, 6].
(2)  (3): The linkage between the airshed and built environment is obvious and direct —
each serves as a boundary condition for the other. In addition, research methodologies,
modeling and simulation tools, and sensor technologies will have many common elements for
these two system platforms.
(3)  (1): The linkage between the watershed and the built environment is less about
“physical integration” than it is about “research and technology synergy.” For example, the
11
“nested-scale” concept applies equally well to the watershed as to the built environment, sensor
development issues are similar for the two systems, the information management and control
systems can be based on the same basic architecture, similar basic advances in transport
phenomena and biological & chemical processes can help to fuel both types of systems. In the
end, then, the watershed and built systems are being incorporated into the same center because
it would be inefficient not to. Development of one system will accelerate the development of the
other and vice versa.
Finally, as discussed previously, we agree with the Site Review Team that engaged and
energetic industrial partners will be critical to the success of the i-UES. We also believe that
government partners will be critical to the successful development of the i-UES sector. In this
regard we have a significant financial commitment from New York State Energy Research and
Development Authority (NYSERDA) and have engaged federal (e.g., EPA, NOAA) and state
governmental agencies (e.g., New York Department of Environmental Conservation) in elements
of this initiative. [Charley, Phil, Ez, Eric]
Built Environmental System
The primary strengths of the team are the breadth of their expertise and their ability to
simultaneously address and integrate the wide range of research associated with indoor
environmental quality. It must be understood that the research plan with respect to the built
environment encompasses a large number of disciplines and specific research areas. It is not
realistic to expect the team, even in a consortium of this size, to be world leaders in every single
aspect.
Clarification: We recognize that the field of built environments is very broad and encompasses
many disciplines. To address the breadth issue, EQS ERC will have affiliations with other
centers and groups that have complementary capabilities. In addition to the EQS ERC core and
outreach partners, collaborative agreements are already in place with the remaining STAR
partners: SUNY Albany (chemical sensors and nanotechnology), RPI School of Architecture
(lighting and architectural acoustics), SUNY Upstate Medical University (health sciences and
human performance), SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry (environmental
sciences), University of Rochester Medical Center (health sciences), Institute of Ecosystem
Studies (whole urban ecosystem studies). Furthermore, we expect to formalize collaboration
agreements with a number of leading foreign research centers and faculty, notably with the
International Centre for Indoor Environment and Energy in Denmark (Professor O. Fanger),
the National Research Council of Canada (Dr. M. Atef), Tsinghua University in China
(Professor Y. Jiang) and University of Tokyo (Professor S. Kato). [Ez, Jensen]
There are some outstanding individuals and groups in the fundamental thrust areas. However, there
is a need to broaden the expertise in the Human Performance fundamental thrust area.
Response: The Human Performance thrust is led by Professors Alan Hedge of Cornell (College
of Human Ecology) and Laurel Carney of Syracuse (Institute of Sensory research)[Alan,
Laurel]. They will be supported by additional faculty from RPI’s School of Architecture
(architectural acoustics and lighting an their effect on human performance). In addition,
through the ongoing STAR Center partnership with SUNY Upstate Medical University (UMU),
the EQS ERC has access to human performance and health sciences experts at UMU’s Institute
of Human Performance. We are also in the process of formalizing collaboration agreements
with the International Center for Indoor Environment and Energy in Denmark (Professor Ole
12
Fanger) and with the National Research Council of Canada. Both have extensive expertise in
the study of the effect of the indoor environment of human performance and satisfaction.
Laboratory facilities, both planned and currently in place, appear to be very good and appropriate
for the planned research. There appears to be good collaboration among the researchers and the core
institutions with several ongoing collaborations that appear to be working well. There is outstanding
support for the research programs both within the institutions and the State of New York. The
planned building/test bed that is to be erected should result in a state-of-the-art facility to conduct
research at the whole-building level. Syracuse University is fully supportive of constructing the
building in such a way that it will, in fact, incorporate the needed capabilities. This support is
important, as it is often difficult to get a building owner to allow the necessary tradeoffs between
building size and research capability. It has the potential to be amongst the very best such building
research facilities in the world.
Within the team there are strengths in important areas within the broad range of indoor
environmental research. The field is so broad that even a consortium of this size cannot address
every single potential research question and need. However, the team appears to have appropriately
addressed the key engineering areas that are essential: large numbers of distributed sensors and
monitors, computer modeling on a broad range of spatial and temporal scales, massive data stream
management and intelligent control. The proposed ERC does need to be strengthened in the area of
social science. Specifically, the areas of technology acceptance and widespread utilization and the
potential for unexpected adverse impacts on people (e.g., invasion of privacy) need to be addressed.
During the site visit, we received assurances from the team and the Syracuse University
Administration that they would devote the necessary attention and resources to these research
needs.
Response: The research team has been expanded to include economists with extensive
experience in energy economics, environmental economics, and in the economics of technical
change. A key focus of this group will be to understand the lessons to be learned from the
history of energy efficiency technology over the last 30 years, which has diffused into the
economy more slowly than would have been expected on its technical merits alone. The team
will identify adoption barriers that BES and UES are likely to face, such as those that BES will
have in common with energy efficiency technology, and will: (1) work with the engineering and
science teams to help ensure that EQS technology is designed, where possible, to minimize
adoption barriers; and (2) develop public policies that could be used to overcome any
remaining barriers. Economics Professors Peter Wilcoxen and David Popp of Syracuse
University have already agreed to participate and others have been invited to join the team, at
no cost to NSF (part of Syracuse University’s $1M matching contribution).
The EQS ERC team has an ongoing project with Professor Jane Read of the Department of
Geography at Syracuse University that is relevant to the i-UES initiative (a poster of this project
was presented at the site visit). Dr. Read has interest and expertise in the use of remotely sensed
data to develop data layers for use as input values and for the validation of predictions of
spatial models. It is envisioned Dr. Read would continue to conduct research to advance i-UES.
In addition, the team will work closely with Syracuse University’s EnSPIRE (Environment and
Society: Partnership for Interdisciplinary Research and Education), which includes architects,
engineers, scientists, economists, and faculty from the schools of public policy and law.
13
Syracuse University is also prepared to hire additional social science faculty to support the
center should the above resources prove inadequate.
We recognize that some of the new sensing technologies envisioned for personal i-EQS could be
perceived as having the potential to invade privacy. This technology entails using an extensive
network of sensors. Although it is not the intended purpose of such sensors, the detected
chemicals may reveal invasive and personal information about the occupants, such as drug use.
However, this is not inherent in the technologies themselves but could arise if the information
collected by the sensors is not adequately protected. Such information will have to be handled
with the same sensitivity as in other systems that collect personal data, e.g., financial or health
information. EQS ERC faculty members in the Controls and Information Management thrust
include experts in information assurance and will ensure that adequate measures are taken in
the design of the i-EQS information management system to protect personal data.
Privacy will be a very important issue in the center’s human performance research as well.
Measurement of any health and/or productivity metrics will only be used to evaluate the impact
of specific system designs, and all such evaluations will be conducted with the voluntary and
informed participation of subjects in accordance with University Committee on Human Subjects
requirements for confidentiality. Further, we teach our students how to methodically handle
ethical dilemmas, so that as engineers they can deal with the societal impact of their work on a
routine basis. If we come across any ethical issues as this technology is implemented, we will
deal with them methodically and in collaboration with ethicists within the member institutions.
3. Education and Educational Outreach
Review Criteria:
 Education plan integrates the ERC's research activities and results into curricula at all
levels, achieves a team-based, cross-disciplinary culture for undergraduate and graduate
students, and incorporates effective plans for implementation, assessment and dissemination
of curricular materials;
 Outreach will expose a broad spectrum of faculty, teachers and students to the ERC's
research culture, impact pre-college curricula and motivate students to study engineering.
The proposed educational program is well conceived. The integration of the State’s educational
resources to address its educational needs is well planned. The proposal takes the education
question from K-12 all the way to the graduate programs of the leading higher education institutions
of the participating educational partners. The plan includes outreach to K-12 education through
summer experiences for teachers, web-based teaching tools (e.g., Microworlds), and outreach
through local museums. The existing K-12 programs of these institutions will be used and also
supplemented within the Center activities. Cross-institutional undergraduate and graduate curricula
are addressed. The pipeline system is used to identify and educate the younger generation at all
levels. The proposal and presentations have presented this process in significant detail, which was
convincing. Most importantly, they have a well-conceived management plan for on-going
development and assessment of educational outreach approaches and intra-ERC education.
Outreach to the relevant professional community is to be accomplished through active involvement
of industrial representatives in research project planning and project selection. In addition, summer
internships for ERC students with participating industry should provide natural outreach. Finally,
there is a carefully targeted plan in place for attracting additional industrial partners into the ERC’s
14
research and education activities. Involvement of underrepresented minorities will be achieved
through the core partnership with the University of Puerto Rico-Mayaguez and the diversity in place
at the other partner institutions. A thorough and well-conceived plan for minority involvement at
multiple levels was presented. Specific outreach targeted at women does not appear to be necessary
because of the high proportion of women currently attracted to environmentally oriented
undergraduate and graduate studies.
The site visit team sought information on the international collaboration aspects of the educational
and research activities. The question posed to the research team and the answer received are
included in the documents of the site visit report.
Clarification: We expect to formalize collaboration agreements with a number of leading
foreign research centers and faculty, notably with the International Centre for Indoor
Environment and Energy in Denmark (Professor O. Fanger), the National Research Council of
Canada (Dr. M. Atef), Tsinghua University in China (Profession Y. Jiang), University of Tokyo
(Professor S. Kato), University of Helsinki (Professor M. Kulmala), and others [Ez, Jensen,
Pramod…]
3. Industrial Collaboration
Review Criteria:
 Proposal provides a convincing rationale for the selection of industrial/user partners and
engages these partners in planning, research, education, and technology transfer;
 Commitments from firms to be fee-paying members of the ERC, if an award is made;
 Proposed terms of the industrial membership agreement will structure a center-wide
program of industrial collaboration to support overall ERC goals, as opposed to a
collection of individual sponsored projects;
 Proposed terms of the intellectual property policy will facilitate technology transfer.
Information on the industrial partners was derived from the proposal, oral presentation, and a
private meeting of the site review team and the industrial partners. The meeting was attended by 21
individuals representing 17 current supporters of Syracuse University’s New York Indoor
Environmental Quality Center (NYIEQ), which was established in 2000. The site team was told that
if awarded NYIEQ will be merged into the ERC. The partners selected for the proposed ERC
represent an impressively large and diverse group of industrial/user partners with high relevance to
the proposed planning, research, education, and technology transfer. These companies appear to be
very enthusiastic about the creation of the ERC and its potential value to their enterprises. Some
firms have already offered internships to graduate and undergraduate students from the participating
universities. There may be additional firms that could play important roles when the ERC is
established. It is expected that the memberships in the first and second year will reach twenty five.
The companies attending the meeting stated their intention to actively recruit additional firms
located outside the immediate geographical region. A significant number of the firms have already
demonstrated commitment to paying fees for participation in the ERC. The terms of industrial
membership adequately represents a center-wide program of industrial collaboration to support
overall ERC goals. The several participating universities have adopted various intellectual property
policies. There is currently a State of New York initiative to develop a uniform policy to facilitate
technology transfer.
15
4. Infrastructure
Review Criteria:
 Institutional configuration is appropriate to the goals of the ERC; and, for multi-university
ERCs, collaboration is integrated across the participating universities;
 ERC has expertise in all disciplines required to attain its goals, a capable leadership team,
and leadership, faculty and student teams that are diverse in gender, race, and ethnicity;
 Organizational structure and management plan effectively organize and integrate the
resources of the ERC to achieve its goals and include strong advisory and project
selection/evaluation systems; and for a multi-university proposal, the resources of the lead
and core partner institutions must be effectively integrated;
 Experimental, computational, and other required equipment, facilities, and laboratory space
are in place or proposed to support the research of the Center;
 The participating institutions have committed to encourage, support and facilitate the
dissemination of the interdisciplinary research, educational and diversity programs of the
ERC;
 Headquarters space proposed for the Center will effectively encourage and facilitate
interdisciplinary collaboration and house the management functions of the ERC.
The integration is strong across the six participating Universities as they have complementary
expertise, including the expertise in outdoor airflow modeling and measurements at the University
of Puerto Rico. The presentations in the first day of the site visit demonstrated that the universities
have most of the necessary expertise within the alliance, and should seek additional expertise in the
social sciences. This came as the first of the questions for clarification after the first day of the
review. An especially strong statement came from Deborah A. Freund, Vice Chancellor and Provost
of the Syracuse University. She assured the site visit team that she will personally be overseeing and
supporting greater involvement of social scientists, even to the point of hiring a new faculty
member, if needed for the ERC. Overall, the administration identified the proposed EQS research
area as one of the top four priority areas.
Clarification: Syracuse University hired Professor Peter Wilcoxen, an expert on environmental
economics. Professor Wilcoxen has agreed to join the EQS ERC Team, so has Professor David
Popp, an expert on diffusion of technology innovations. The Core Team already includes
Psychologists specializing in the effect of environmental factors on human performance and
sensory response. Also, professor Jane Read of the Department of Geography at Syracuse
University is a principal investigator on an existing project that is closely aligned with the EQS
ERC. Dr. Read’s research interest is in the area of remote sensing which could support
envisioned i-UES activities. Additional expertise in the social sciences are available through
existing and planned partnerships within the core institutions and through collaboration with
US and foreign centers. These experts will be engaged as needed at no cost to the NSF ERC
program (through matching contributions or other external resources). [Ed, Ez]
The ERC has a very well developed management plan. The Center Director, Dr. H.E. Khalifa, has
23 years of corporate R&D experience in environmental control and energy conversion systems.
His academic and industrial experience makes him an ideal individual to foster strong partnerships
with industry and to instill the attitude among Center researchers needed to respond to industry
16
needs. Dr. Khalifa’s technical expertise is in the built environment portion of the proposed research.
He is assisted by Dr. Driscoll, who brings strong expertise in the watershed area.
The research direction of the Center will be guided by a Technical Advisory Board and an Industrial
Advisory Board, while inter-institutional issues will be handled through a Dean’s Academic
Leadership Council. It appears that the six institutions participating in the ERC have a history of
established collaborative research, which should facilitate the usually difficult inter-institutional
management of research. The ERC has a good process for selecting, refining, evaluating and
terminating research. The thrust area leaders identified in the proposal are capable and have
established records in their respective fields.
The available research facilities are simply impressive. They already have test facilities built and
functional in value of $15 millions sponsored by New York state STAR program. The existing
facilities are state of the art in the U.S. and world and will be used to study and heat and mass
transport in and from building component materials. The State of New York has already approved
additional funding of $22 million in June 2002. This additional funding will be used to build an
entire high-performance building that will be test facility and demonstration facility for the
technologies to be developed. Such a large-scale experimental facility to study environmental air
quality, when completed, will be unique in the world.
The headquarters for the proposed ERC would be housed in the Link Engineering Hall. In
particular, the headquarters will occupy the 3rd and 4th floor of this building. The existing spaces
would be adapted to accommodate students and faculty from different departments to work together
and communicate effectively. The adaptation would be finished within one year from the starting
date of the project. The University already allocated $750K to upgrade an existing facility to
organize a Virtual Center for communication between the partners in the proposed center that would
enable efficient communication and work on joint projects.
Clarification: We already have $750K from the STAR budget earmarked for IT infrastructure at
SU and its partners (communication hub and distributed resources, video conferencing, storage,
etc). Syracuse University pledged another $500K+ for space renovation of Link Hall’s 3 rd floor
to house EQS ERC HQ. [Ed, Eric, Ez]
The total support for the ERC in the first year is $13.8M in cash and in-kind (NSF 18%; State
Government 40%; University 12%; Industry 5%; Other Federal 23%; and Other 2%). Syracuse
University will annually cost share $1M in cash and $600K in-kind. The Governor of New York
has committed to provide $500K in cash, and the New York State Energy Research and
Development Administration (NYSERDA) has committed $600K annually to the ERC.
Clarification: The $1M in cash includes $500K contribution from SU and $500K from the other
core partners; the $600K in-kind includes $500K form SU and $100K from other core partners.
References:
1) Driscoll, C.T., G.B. Lawrence, A.J. Bulger, T.J. Butler, C.S. Cronan, C. Eagar, K.F. Lambert, G.E. Likens, J.L.
Stoddard and K.C. Weathers. 2001. Acidic deposition in the northeastern U.S.: sources and inputs, ecosystems
effects, and management strategies. BioScience 51:180-198.
2) Gbondo-Tugbawa, S.S., C.T. Driscoll, J.D. Aber and G.E. Likens. 2001. Evaluation of an integrated
biogeochemical model (PnET-BGC) at a northern hardwood forest ecosystem. Water Resour. Res. 37:10571070.
17
3) Gbondo-Tugbawa, S.S. and C.T. Driscoll. 2002a. Evaluation of the effects of future controls on sulfur dioxide
and nitrogen oxide emissions on the acid-base status of a northern forest ecosystem. Atmos. Environ. 36:16311643.
4) Gbondo-Tugbawa, S.S. and C.T. Driscoll. 2002b. A retrospective analysis of the response of soil and stream
chemistry of a northern forest ecosystem to atmospheric emission controls from the 1970 and 1990
Amendments of the Clean Air Act. Environ. Sci. Technol. 36:7414-7420.
5) Castro, M.S. and C.T. Driscoll. 2002. Atmospheric nitrogen deposition to estuaries in the mid-Atlantic and
northeastern United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 36:3242-3249.
6) Driscoll, C., D. Whitall, J. Aber, E. Boyer, M. Castro, C. Cronan, C. Goodale, P. Groffman, C. Hopkinson, K.
Lambert, G. Lawrence and S. Ollinger. Nitrogen pollution in the Northeastern United States: sources, effects
and management options. BioScience (in press).
7) Gbondo-Tugbawa, S. and C.T. Driscoll. 1998. Application of the Regional Mercury Cycling Model (RMCM) to
predict the fate and remediation of mercury in Onondaga Lake. Water Air Soil Pollut. 105:417-426.
8) Munson, R., C. Driscoll and M. McHale. 2002. Mercury in Adirondack Wetlands, Lakes and Terrestrial
Systems (MAWLTS). Interim Report for New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Tetra
Tech, Lafayette, CA.
18